Filed: May 29, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6093 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DONALD RAY BARBER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:93-cr-00124-FDW-1; 3:07-cv-00454-FDW) Submitted: May 22, 2008 Decided: May 29, 2008 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per c
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6093 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DONALD RAY BARBER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:93-cr-00124-FDW-1; 3:07-cv-00454-FDW) Submitted: May 22, 2008 Decided: May 29, 2008 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per cu..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6093
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DONALD RAY BARBER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney,
District Judge. (3:93-cr-00124-FDW-1; 3:07-cv-00454-FDW)
Submitted: May 22, 2008 Decided: May 29, 2008
Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Donald Ray Barber, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, United
States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Donald Ray Barber appeals from the denial of his motion
for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. United States v. Barber, Nos.
3:93-cr-00124-FDW-1, 3:07-cv-00454-FDW (W.D.N.C. Oct. 25, 2007).
In addition, we decline to consider the claim raised by Barber for
the first time on appeal. See Muth v. United States,
1 F.3d 246,
250 (4th Cir. 1993). We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 2 -